Chapter 8

Working with People

Many people that go into engineering as a career have the misconception that being an
engineer means sitting at desk by themselves every day performing calculations and analyzing
results. But it is the rare engineering job that fits this preconception. Most of the time engineers
need to work with others. One of the most common suggestions that industrial advisory boards
give to academic engineering programs is that they devote more time to teaching students how to
work in teams and to deal with the inevitable conflicts that arise when groups of people work
together.
It is much easier to develop a good working relationship with another person if that
person trusts you. Trust is not a right, it is earned. In section 8.1 we will introduce the concept of
engineering ethics and how, through ethical conduct, you can become known to those you work
with as a person of integrity.
Section 8.2 provides information that may be useful for you when working in teams. We
will describe the general roles that are typically present in successful teams (section 8.2.1), the
characteristics of high performing teams (section 8.2.2), and how to operate your team by
consensus rather than by compromise or by majority rules processes (section 8.2.3).
In section 8.3 we will look at ways to resolve conflicts while in section 8.4 we will look
at how to work towards win-win solutions by using good negotiating strategies.
8.1 Ethical conduct and personal integrity
There are three underlying factors that motivate our behaviors. The first factor is a
person’s moral code. Morals are our personal beliefs in what is right and what is wrong. The
second factor is based on our understanding of the legality of the behavior. That is, how is a
given action governed by laws or regulations. The third underlying factor affecting our behavior
is how that behavior conforms or does not conform to our ethics. Ethics refers to a suite of
acceptable principles of conduct. Anytime we do something that impacts the lives of others
(which is most of the time), we are guided by ethics.
Each of us has a personal moral code. That code was developed based on a number of
different inputs. These include:
 The instruction and corrections provided to us by our parents or other care-givers
 Through observation of, or participation in, the behaviors of others, especially those we
admire and those in our immediate social network
 The lessons/writings/instruction of religious or civic teachers and/or organizations
 Behaviors observed or experienced through various forms of communications media
including writings, movies, video programming, and even video games
 Ideals inherent in the culture in which we live
 Personal reflections and experiences
Everyone has a unique moral code and everyone’s moral code changes over time as they
have more life experiences. We are typically more comfortable being with others who have a
moral code that is similar to our own; who share many of our values. However, in the course of
1
our lives we must often interact and cooperate with those who have different values. Knowing
that others have a different moral value system is a keep step in being able to work effectively
with others as will be explored more fully in sections 8.2 and 8.3, below.
While morality helps us to decide what is right and what is wrong, ethics provides us with
guidance on how to behave in society, regardless of how my moral code aligns to that of others.
To be a true professional, one who acts ethically, your decisions and actions should:
 Be consistent with your professional moral principles (those that are relevant to your conduct
as an engineer)
 Be consistent with generally accepted codes of conduct
For chemical/process engineers, I suggest that your behavior should be guided by three
professional codes of conduct:
1. The American Institute of Chemical Engineers Code of Ethics
2. The code of ethics of the National Society of Professional Engineers
3. The Engineer’s Creed
While any of these three sources can be used for guidance, we cover the first of these here. The
others are readily accessible through their web home pages.
The AIChE Code of Ethics
The AIChE code of ethics states that the goal of every engineer should be to uphold and
advance the integrity, honor, and dignity of the engineering profession by:
 Being honest/impartial, serving with fidelity
 Employers, clients, public
 Striving to increase competence/prestige of the engineering profession
 Using knowledge/skill for enhancement of human welfare
Further, the responsibilities of an engineer are:
1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public in performance of your
professional duties
2. Formally advise your employers/clients if you perceive that a consequence of your duties
will adversely affect the present or future health/safety of your colleagues or the public
a. Consider further disclosure if warranted
3. Accept responsibility for your actions/recognize the contributions of others
a. Seek critical review of your work
b. Offer objective criticism of the work of others
4. Issue statements/present information only in an objective/truthful manner
5. Act in professional matters for each employer/ client as a faithful agent/trustee and avoid
conflicts of interest
6. Treat fairly all colleagues/coworkers, recognizing their unique contributions and capabilities

2
7. Perform professional services only in your areas of competence
8. Build your professional reputation on the merit of your services
9. Continue your professional development throughout your career and provide opportunities
for the professional development of those under your supervision
Ethical Decision-Making
We often find ourselves in circumstances where the choices of behavior are not black and
white. Studying various potential tough scenarios and exploring possible decisions and their
consequences can be very useful so that when we are in an actual tough situation, we are
comfortable figuring out the decisions that we will find later, upon reflection, to be the decisions
we should make (based on our moral code and acceptable ethic codes of conduct). There are
many books and on-line resources you can use to explore this topic in much fuller detail.
However, here is a list of decision-making heuristics that you might find useful:
1. Use a traditional problem-solving strategy for solving ethical problems.
2. Consider what will happen if a decision is based on a false assumption.
3. Be honest.
4. Be concerned about the welfare of your company and employees.
5. Do not let other people make ethical decisions for you.
6. Ask yourself if your decision would be different if you worked for another part of the
company (or for another company).
7. Imagine that you live just outside the plant fence.
8. Imagine that you work for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or Occupational
Safety & Health Administration (OSHA).
9. Ask for the opinion of someone else in your organization; don’t make decisions in a vacuum.
We usually work in groups; group discussion can be meaningful and helpful.
10. Learn your corporate culture and policies
11. Get ALL the information you can
At the end of day, the right decision is one that you can live with.
Ethical Conduct and Integrity
Your decisions and behaviors will be better received by others if you are consistently
ethical in your actions and open and honest in your professional conduct. Others will be more
likely to listen to you and to trust you when they feel you are an ethical person; a person of
integrity.
In his book, integrity1, Stephen L. Carter defines integrity as a three-step process:
1. Discernment: determining through careful study of all sides of an issue, what you believe to
be the correct position

1
Stephen L. Carter, (integrity), Perseus Basic Books, 1996.

3
2. Action: the willingness to act on what you believe to be correct even when there is personal
risk
3. Announcement: openly stating your position and the reasons for it even when others
disagree with you.
I encourage you to strive to be a person of integrity.

8.2 Working in teams

Engineers work in teams all the time. These teams may consist of others with similar
training, or be widely multi-disciplinary. Project teams are great examples. During the scoping
study phase, your team may be a small group of chemical engineers while during the project
definition phase you may be working with mechanical, electrical, and civil engineers as well as
economists, marketing specialists, and even lawyers. Therefore, your ability to work and be
effective in all sorts of teams is an important part of your job and may define whether your career
is successful or mediocre.
8.2.1 The Roles of team members
For teams to operate as a cohesive unit, there must be a common sense of purpose and
direction. What does the team do? What is the desired level of quality and efficiency? What
constraints must we acknowledge? What roles will be filled by which team members?
Whether by design or by default, every team tends to have members that fill different
roles for the team. A key role is the role of team facilitator or leader. The purpose of this role is
to help the team stay organized and efficient. The team facilitator insures that the team develops
a common vision as to the purpose of the team and that the team defines a set of objectives that
everyone in the team agrees to follow. The facilitator also guides team discussions so that
assignments can allocated and decisions made in a positive and constructive manner. What the
facilitator should not be is a dictator who tells everyone what to do and who makes all of the
decisions.
Another key role on any team is the questioner. This role is filled by one or more people
who force the team to examine each decision or assumption the team makes to ensure that the
end product is correct and appropriate. Teams that do not have a questioner may miss a key fact
or a better alternative that results in mediocrity. However, those who take on the role of
questioner must be careful not to abuse this role. Questioning every small decision will bog the
group down and reduce productivity. So if you are the questioner on your team, be selective in
when you chose to question the group decisions. Make sure you have both a good reason for
questioning the decision and that the decision is important to the group’s goals. If you are not the
group’s questioner, value the role they play in helping your team reach success. It isn’t easy to
take the contrary position from a group of people you enjoy working with, so don’t come down
hard on them when their actions may be in the group’s best interests.
Groups typically also have one or more scribes or note-takers. The scribe keeps notes
during group meetings and may also maintain a list of key assumptions or decisions that the
group makes as it proceeds with its activities. It can be difficult later to remember why the group
chose to do things a certain way or to use a certain assumption. Therefore good notetaking can be
highly useful for the group.

4
 Finally, most of the group members will be information generators. Information
generators obtain the data needed by the group and transforms these data into useful information.
8.2.2 Characteristics of an effective team
Researchers have found that most successful teams have four characteristics in common:
1. They have a clear sense of direction
2. They act continuously to accomplish the team’s goals and to improve the quality of the
team’s outputs
3. They measure and report the results of their activities and recognize the accomplishments
of the team and of its members, both collectively and individually
4. Each team member accepts both personal and interlocking accountability for the
activities and outputs of the team
In order to create and maintain a successful team culture, each individual member of the team
must:
 Operate as a team member – not go it alone
 Be empowered as individuals – the rest of the team must give them a role and a stake in
the outcomes of the team and the freedom to make suggestions that will improve team
performance as well as to provide input into the decisions the group must make.
An empowered individual is one with the wisdom, ability and courage to change their
personal attitude and/or behavior as required in order to effectively respond to the
environment and circumstances of the team when such change will lead to improved
team performance and/or higher quality team outputs.
 Be accountable for their attitude – in other words, be accountable for our personal
approach to the activities, tasks, and decisions of the team.
It is tempting to try to judge others based on their attitudes. I strongly suggest that you
avoid doing this. You do not know all that is going on the lives of your other team
members. Their seemingly bad attitude could be completely unrelated to the team and to
its mission. For example, they could have recently struggled with a personal problem
like an addiction. Or they could have received word that a close relative or friend has a
terminal disease. There are many reasons why someone might appear to have a bad
attitude.
On the other hand, each of us knows exactly what is going on in our own lives and if we
are honest with ourselves, we can measure our own attitude and its impact on the team.
This type of honest introspection can help us to avoid letting external personal factors
affect the team as a whole and our contribution to the team. After all, the other team
members are also people just like us, with their own personal circumstances. In
successful teams, the team members usually keep external factors from influencing their
attitude towards the team’s activities and decisions.
 Be accountable for their behavior – where behavior is measured by the outcomes of the
actions and activities the each individual performs.

5
 While we should not judge others based on their attitudes, we can measure others based
on what they accomplish. In successful groups, the team members hold each other as well
as the team as a whole accountable for their actions and outcomes. To do this, each
member of the team must be clear on the common vision of the team as well as the
team’s objectives. Behavior can be measured based on how well the team’s objectives are
achieved.

8.2.3 Consensus-building
There are many ways to organize a team. It may be hierarchical, where the leader seeks
input from the other team members but ultimately makes the decisions. Another approach is to
let everyone have input and then to vote on decisions, with the majority vote making the
decision. While these and other approaches can all be effective, your team will be more likely to
be effective and your team experience more enjoyable if you make decisions by consensus.
A consensus is when every member of the team is willing to accept an outcome or
decision. Your willingness to accept or reject a given decision should be based on how
important you believe the decision will be towards reaching the team’s goal and/or based on how
much knowledge you have on the subject compared to the knowledge of the other group
members.
Good team members know when to give consent even when they disagree and when to
withhold consent.
8.3 Conflict resolution and Negotiating Strategies
We go through our lives negotiating. It starts when we negotiate getting fed or changed
or held as an infant. A baby cries or screams and a caregiver gives them what they think the baby
wants. If it’s the right thing, the baby quits crying. If it’s the wrong thing, the baby keeps crying
and the caregiver tries something else. So all of us are natural negotiators.
When agreement between two parties (where a “party” consists of one or more individuals who
basically want or represent others who want the same thing) doesn’t come easily, there can be
conflict. There are many books devoted entirely to the subject of conflict resolution so only an
overview of some fundamental principles is provided here. Agreement between two parties in
conflict can be achieved in one of four ways (figure 8.1):
 Domination
 Capitulation The Results of Negotiation
 Collaboration
 Compromise Win
COLLABORATION
Domination and capitulation O
are two sides of the same T
CAPITULATION
coin. In this form of H
resolution, one of the two E
parties achieves all of their R
most important objectives S
and the other party does not I DOMINATION
achieve any of their primary D COMPROMISE
E
Lose 6 Win
YOUR SIDE

Figure 8.1 The Outcomes of a Conflict

objectives. This is a “win-lose” arrangement and is unhealthy for a long-term sustainable
relationship between the parties. Therefore, it is important to avoid both of these two quadrants
in a negotiation.
For the other two forms of resolution, collaboration is better than compromise. Collaboration is
finding a solution where both parties “win”. That is, both parties end up with their most
important objective(s) in the conflict achieved. In compromise, both parties end up with only a
portion of their most important objective(s) in the conflict achieved. Therefore both parties
“lose”.
In a conflict, two sides take positions that are mutually exclusive. Negotiating from these
positions can only result in domination/capitulation or compromise. However in most cases, the
actual interests of the each party do not align exactly with the positions those parties take in the
negotiation. Positions are a translation of interests but are not always the exact interest. So while
positions are often mutually exclusive (hence the conflict), interests are usually NOT mutually
exclusive. It is this difference between positions and interests that provides an opportunity for a
collaborative, win-win, agreement.
Here is an example. Ben and Enrique wind up at the meat counter in their local grocery
store at the same time. Ben asks the butcher for a leftover beef bone. Then, Enrique asks for the
same thing but is told that Ben has been given the last bone. Here is now a conflict. Both Ben
and Enrique want a beef bone. In domination/capitulation, one of the two would insist on getting
the bone and the other would have capitulated and gone without. You can be sure that these two
will not be getting together to share any bones in the future.
Here’s another solution. After discussion, an agreement is reached and the butcher is
asked to cut the beef bone in half so that each of them can have a portion of the bone. This is a
compromise – each gave up ½ of the bone to reach an agreement.
Ben took his bone home and used it as stock to make a pot of soup. Since he only had ½
of the bone, he could only make half the amount of soup he had originally planned. Enrique took
his bone home and gave it to his dog to eat. Again, the dog only got half the amount of bone
Enrique had planned. The positions for both Ben and Enrique were the same, one beef bone. But
their interests, the reason they wanted the bone, were different.
To reach a collaboration, Ben might have asked Enrique, why do you want the bone? By
understanding the motives behind the Enrique’s position, Ben may be able to learn that Enrique’s
true interests in the bone are. It could just as easily be Enrique that asks Ben. It doesn’t really
matter as long as both parties are willing to exchange information to determine if their true
interests allow for a collaborative solution. In this case the two could agree that Ben would take
the entire bone home and use it to make a pot of soup. He would then bring the bone to Enrique
so his dog could enjoy the entire bone. This is a “win-win” solution. Given the positive nature of
this transaction, it is possible that might Ben bring along some of his soup to share with Enrique
while they watched Enrique’s dog play and eat the bone. Friendships have formed from less.
Thus, the key to negotiating the best solution to a conflict is:
1. Use two-way communications to understand what motivates the other party to establish their
position
2. Use this understanding to determine he other party’s most important interests

7
3. Look for solutions mutually acceptable to the most important interests of both parties
Finding mutually acceptable solutions often requires creativity and innovation and always
requires patience as each side needs to explore the conflict in sufficient detail to find a solution
that both will accept. Ideas need to be generated without criticism so that both sides continue the
communications necessary to reach a collaborative solution. If animosity is present, a neutral
third party facilitator may be required. Most major companies have either an in-house facilitator
or a trusted third party consultant who can provide these services.